In Brief
Eight landowners challenged a Panchayat/Municipality's use of their agricultural land for road construction without compensation. The Panchayat claimed the land was voluntarily surrendered; the owners asserted they were promised compensation. The Single Judge found no evidence supporting voluntary surrender and awarded compensation rights under Article 300A. The Division Bench reversed, shifting the burden to the owners to prove they were promised compensation. The Supreme Court restored the Single Judge's judgment, holding that the burden lies on the entity claiming voluntary surrender to produce documentary proof, which the Panchayat failed to do. Early representations claiming compensation negated the \"stale claim\" argument. Deprivation without compensation violated Article 300A, and the owners were entitled to compensation as determined by the Collector.">
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.